Use Your myFollowTheMoney Login

Or

Welcome to myFollowTheMoney, the customized e-mail alert community with deeper access to the unique and powerful data from the National Institute on Money in State Politics.

By creating a free myFollowTheMoney account, you’ll not only be able to download our data for your own exploration, you can also receive updates from us on the issues you care about. In addition, you’ll be signed up to receive our quarterly newsletter, packed with insider information on the hot topics facing money in state politics.

We will not share, rent, or sell your e-mail address with any other individual or organization.

Gambling on Expansion

Voters were asked to approve the expansion of gaming in five states during elections held in 2011 and 2012. These measures met with a 50 percent success rate: four of the eight measures passed.

In three states—Maryland, Oregon, and Maine—competing casino operators and casino developers lined up against each other and contributed the majority of the money around the measures.

Seven of the gaming measures in four states—Maine, Maryland, Oregon, and Rhode Island—attracted a total of $115 million. A fifth state, New Jersey, also had a gambling measure on the ballot in 2011, but no committees formed to raise money around the measure.

*All committees formed around these measures had positions on both measures.

**The money raised in support was $4,200,299 for Question 2 and $589,498 for Question 3. The money raised in opposition was $2,420,118 for both Questions 2 & 3, and $5,625 for only Question 3.

Maryland’s Question 7 attracted $95 million, making it the most expensive political campaign of any kind in Maryland’s history.45 Passed by only 3.8 percentage points, this measure allowed expansion of video gaming and the operation of table games.

The measure elicited a showdown between two major gambling companies. Penn National Gaming gave more than $44 million in opposition, and MGM Resorts gave nearly $41 million in support. Although most of the supporters would benefit through expansion of their current casinos or development of new ones, some speculated that Penn National Gaming was opposed to the measure to avoid competition with its large casino in neighboring West Virginia.6 Peterson Development Companies, which would build MGM’s proposed casino if approved, gave $4.6 million in support of the measure.7

Voters rejected both of the 2012 gambling-related measures in Oregon (measures 82 and 83) despite supporters having raised more money. The measures were tied together: Measure 82 would have allowed the operation of casinos by non-tribal private owners, and Measure 83 would have restricted it to just one non-tribal casino. Committees with positions on the measures raised a total of $8.6 million, with $2.9 million opposing the measures and $5.7 million supporting them. Nearly all of the support for the measures came from PDX Entertainment Group, a Canadian organization that wanted to build and operate non-tribal casinos in the state.8 Five Native American tribes raised 93 percent of the money to oppose the measures, including $2.6 million from the Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde.

In 2011, Maine voters rejected two measures to expand gambling. Question 2 would have allowed two harness horse racing facilities in the city of Biddeford and Washington County to add slot machines, and Question 3 would have allowed one facility in the city of Lewiston to run slot machines and table games. Committees opposing the measures raised $2.4 million. Committees supporting the measures raised $4.8 million, twice as much as the opposition. The largest opponent to the measures, with $940,662, was Penn National Gaming, owner of Hollywood Casino,9 which at the time of the 2011 elections was the only casino in the state (Oxford Casino had been approved but had not yet opened).10 Black Bear Entertainment, the developer of Oxford Casino, and a group named Friends of Oxford Casino, gave a combined $890,274 to oppose the measures.11 The largest supporter of Question 2 was Ocean Properties, the developer who would have built the new casinos had they been approved.12 Ocean Properties contributed $3.7 million in support, most of which were loans to Putting Maine to Work, a committee advocating for the measure.

Rhode Island passed two measures in 2012 to add table gaming to existing casinos. Question 1 authorizes table gaming at Twin River and Question 2 authorizes it at Newport. Question 1 had nearly $5 million raised in support; Question 2 had $3,050 in support. Neither measure had any money raised in opposition. All of the money supporting question 1 came from UTGR Inc., which is the corporate name of Twin River Casino.13

In 2011, New Jersey voters passed by a 28 percent margin a constitutional amendment to allow wagering on sports events at Atlantic City casinos and at horse race tracks. No money was identified in support or opposition.

5. The most expensive gambling measures thus far were in California in 2008, when more than $172 million was raised around severalgambling measures to expand tribal gaming rights. Accessed Feb. 13, 2014.